About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16
from what comes out of this first, if you will, pilot phase so the reporting requirements will tell us a lot. and we'll be very informative to the next steps going forward. that's feedback loop is something we want to give you detailed input on. but what's come out from this long process is now before you and the full board is a good compromise. thanks very much. >> thank you, mr. cohen. >>> good afternoon, supervisors. congratulations, supervisor mar, for your brilliant reelection. and thank you, supervisor wiener, for bringing this up. as tim cohen said a little while ag i am concerned also. i do work a lot with the construction industry. i'm concerned if we only allow 375 units to be built, it ain't gonna happen because people -- bankers might say, you know what, this is great, but what's going to happen after this? [speaker not understood]. i'd like to say go forward but i think we really should think about expanding it. thank you. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment? seeing none, mr. chairman, may we close public comment? >> yes, public comment is closed. >> i wan
not understood] helping us with outreach, she maintains the list of community members who are involved who asked questions. we also worked with the cac and the cac drives a big turnout. i'm building that mailing list as i go because as we get a lot of comments online, we have an interactive place where people can plug into give us input and be part of our e-mail list. we're trying to go beyond e-mail. we have social networks, conventional mail, handwritten a few letters who to people who don't want to work on computers. this is helping get out to the bigger community. this is the time to work with us and it would be fantastic to have the input televised and having more forums like these. >> i would agree with you that the people plan for the america's cup is good data, but this is specific to this area. that's a little bit different than the america's cup which as a huge spill. i'm glad there is a commitment to work closely with the neighborhood surrounding the development. so, thank you. >> may i? >> supervisor kim. >> thank you. mr. albert, thank you so much. i do appreciate the fact i do thi
concerns. if i can use the overhead projector. so when -- so the distance of 50' is not actually 50'. so when you think about, it's from the property line. it's not from the center of a restaurant. and so it's actually closer to 60' of a buffer zone. from our perspective, what that does and the map i'm going to show you here -- so the black is actually the available air area for use. all of the dots are existing restaurants and this by the way, as you can see is a 50' diameter. when you move, when you move to a 60' diameter, you can see it becomes much more concentrated and space becomes much more limited. so i think in terms of what the industry vendors are actually interested in is something much closer to a 33' distance. which looks more like that. this is 40'. so it's actually a little bit -- it shows a little bit more space than is available, but really it still leaves opportunity for areas. as you can see, certain areas that are highly dense with restaurants would be out of bounds. the other thing i wanted to bring up is the idea of parking. this permit has given people
of the sustainable streets division. i thought it would be good for us to get an update on what was discussed there. i think there are a lot of things we can learn from other cities that are going through the same challenges that we are with our multi-modal shift and goals. i know they recently came out in an urban streets design guide. [speaker not understood] called out transportation planners as being so important to the future of america. so, i know that we have thankfully some of the best and the brightest in the nation. so, i think it would be really interesting to just get an update from them about what went on there and what it's going to mean for us and our work. >> thank you. members, we'll ask mr. haley and mr. reiskin report back to the meeting. unfinished business? seeing none. >> item 7, directors report. and we are anticipating scott wiener shortly. >> better hang onto that for the first part. i will go to the next one, if i may, mr. chairman. let me take the first awardee that we'll recognize is alan ewan who is a senior of fair collection receiver in the revenue department. he has
, like those farm workers that taught us to work very hard day and night, like my mother who was a house maid in the presidio and taught me to work very, very hard everyday. like my father who is a shoe repair man in north point in embarcadero who taught me to work very hard and all those central americans who taught me to struggle and a balanced peace in our communities, so with that i would like to say it's a honor to be part of this administration and my vision is to be hold public safety in a balanced way, but at the same time looking at long-term goals that really sustain violence prevention services like a community, as a community, as a united community of san francisco, and so today i just want to honor elpueblo. [speaking spanish] , the village united will never be defeated and i trurl believe in that spirit and i honor those ancestors and all the people that taught us that concept and i hope i can bring that spirit to you and work really hard to make our community safer. thank you. [applause] >> i just have to say i have known her for the most of my working life and she's a fi
street c. request for conditional use authorization. item 5, case no. 2012.0725c, 475 eucalyptus drive, request for conditional use authorization. i have no speaker cards, commissioners, for these items. >> is there any public comment on the items on the consent calendar? seeing none, commissioner moore? >> i ask that item 475 eucalyptus drive on consent, i have a couple of questions. and i think this commission needs to have instructions on how this particular use is regulated. so, i ask that it be moved. >> commissioner antonini. >> given that, i would move that we approve the other two items on the consent calendar. those being items number 3, i guess it is, and 4. >> second. >> no, it's 2 and 3. >> just to make it clear, one is 738 6th avenue and the other is 501-503 and 505-51 1 laguna. >> i second that. >> on the motion to continue items 3 and 4 -- excuse me to approve items 3 and 4, excuse me. commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner borden? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >>
is with us this afternoon and appreciate the work that he has been doing and ja -- ja king torres and the community members that stepped up and we have other members and former supervisor member dufty and cohen is out there often and you can see swing dancing in the plaza. i want to introduce to you theresa but also with theresa is a very special person. i want to introduce chef kevin so chef kevin has been incredible in helping the youth to understand the value of running a restaurant and has been working with them, and showing them how to cook basically, and i just saw chef kevin at another wonderful event, our california youth connections who work with our foster youth and donating his time and incredible jump laila and behind me i would like to introduce tammy, dominique, erin, deserie, chris, chef kevin and the leader of the pack theresa. plawz welcome old school cafe. [applause] and the mayor has presented them with a proclamation and they had time with him in his office and it was an honor to seeing the incredible youth doing what they do. they run the restaurant from th
where another great district 11 restaurant used to be "momma's cooking" and "broken record" is there established in 2008 and a great place to eat and a great watering hole in this part of san francisco and in fact there is a group of people that come from san francisco and the bay area to come to the broken record. a great selection of drinks and whiskeys and jason is a big aficionado of whiskeys and things his bar and had different things come and in in that site. it's been an incubator in san francisco. whoever ran the kitchen over the last couple of years are now opening up a restaurant on 400hade street and ricky hobby and there is a great deal of work done and broken work to bring new restaurants and cuisines and always like north american cuisines to san francisco and the southern part of san francisco and i wanted to congratulate jason king for a great establishment, for bringing together giants fans over the year and look forward to you opening up next monday. >> great supervisor. why don't we go to district ten and supervisor cohen. we're going in reverse ord
. this is the land use and economic development committee of the san francisco board of supervisors. my name is eric mar, i'm the chair of the committee. to my left is supervisor scott wiener. supervisor maly a cohen is absent today. our clerk is derek evans. mr. evans, can you please give us the announcements? >> yes. please make sure all electronic devices are off, copies submitted to the clerk. items acted upon today will appear on december 4, 2012 san francisco board of supervisors agenda unless stated. >> thank you. we have six items on the agenda today. but i've been notified by supervisor olague, item number 5, she has urged us to continue that to item on the call of the chair. that is the resolution to remove all management proposals and activities derived from the sharp park conceptual restoration alternatives report's alternative a18 from the environmental impact report for the san francisco recreation and park department's significant natural resource areas management plan, and to consider proposals and alternatives for the future of sharp park golf course through a separate and complete
single handedly stopped the project at lafayette park using c-e-q-a, i actually aired my complaints when the city began construction as the park with no building permits. and i aired those complaints down the hall with the people who handle building permits. they really didn't have much to do with c-e-q-a at all. but it does raise the question about should a person be allowed to say something if they think something is wrong and what should the notice process be. and, in fact, c-e-q-a is not designed so that the state provides notice to people. it's specifically that the enforcement of c-e-q-a as well as the notification would be handled locally. and what we have here is an effort to change things such that it would be very hard on people to know what's happening. another issue that has come up several times is the raised level of proof to substantial evidence. i can say that with the short time frame and given the number of exemptions to the sunshine ordinance such that if you ask for voluminous documents, which means anything over 50 pages, you no longer have the right to have your doc
have helped to bring to us this point where we have this compromise. so you have heard about a lot of the issues already mentioned today. and, basically, what this is about, is that we think, this is experimental type of housing which, is all fine and good but we should treat it as such as an experiment that we want to watch closely and not allow to just go unchecked without us first knowing about the potential impact and that is because browse we have all thought careful fully about what those impacts might be and we have come one a long array, including because these units are actually above market, now, we have heard all of the argument about why they are affordable and yes, cheaper impaired to larger studio apartments but by square footage, they are indeed higher rent and therefore, what would be the role in potentially escalating rents in the adjacent buildings and nabses that is one thing and the other thing that you have heard a lot about is the displacement of families because instead of building family housing, we are building housing for single and is whether we have such
dog. we support active recreational uses and adamantly oppose any move to give sharp park to [speaker not understood]. it is suing san francisco to try to force us to close the sharp park golf course and give it to the gg & a. the lawsuit is in the courts right now, but preliminary [speaker not understood]. this resolution will help their lawsuit. a cynical point by them to get you supervisors to do what they don't seem able to get the courts to do, to push their extremist plan to close sharp park golf course and give it to the [speaker not understood]. you shouldn't make it easier for people suing the city to win their lawsuit. stay out of it and vote no. you should not assert pressure on planning while an e-i-r is being developed. that is the intent to change the results of the nap e-i-r. don interfere and vote no on this resolution. the e-i-r in question is supposed to be for the natural area management plan, not just parts of it. you should not allow extremists with a stake in this to pick and choose which parts of the overall nap plan are considered in the e-i-r. if it is to have
to protect the board of supervisors from appeals. so, please stop this legislation. please give all of us time to digest the memo that you just received today and we just received today, and let's go back to having some real involvement of stakeholders in crafting legislation a fresh rather than trying to amend this bad draft. thank you. >>> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is rose hill son. first of all, in this piece of legislation which is new 2012 legislation, it's not something that should be considered as an extension of the 2006 or 2010 legislation. therefore we've had millions of meetings on it, that's not the case. the first meeting i was at was the planning commission meeting on november 15th. so, this is my second one here with you. in the november 21st historic preservation commission meeting there was a big discussion about what the first approval. and therein lies the problem. if you don't know when the first discretionary approval is, no one can figure out when the notice is going to come out, from what department, what agency, and you have all kinds of agencies. airp
on the table for the public. if anyone needs an extra one, they can see us. >> could i ask a quick question to staff? there's references i'm reading in here, and you just mentioned there had been amendments made to the legislation that we have had before us, but we have not received. is that correct? >> that is correct. i would go run copies right now. i'm sorry for that. >> that's all right. we don't need to do that. >> there's one more clarification on your presentation. >> i just wanted -- i'm not sure if i understood this correctly. two things. you said that if one wanted to speak at a later e-i-r hearing, they had to have addressed the d-e-i-r hearing to speak at the later hearing? >> at the appeal hearing, that's correct. >> all right. that was one thing i wasn't clear about. and the other -- on negative declarations, it says there's no appeal to the board unless it first is appealed to the planning commission. i thought it was the other way around. it would be they appeal just to the board. but it has to first go to the planning commission. they can't directly much to the board for a
and this is in our meetings where we used criteria of the 75 -- it has a 75' buffer, but that is from the center of the restaurant or the food establishment address, which is how we came up with the 50'. so just to kind of take a look at the density and then the second one is the citywide view. so just to make sure sort of under some of the clarifications in terms of distinctions the proximity to a restaurant and like food is not something that dpw gets into looking at until it's contested and as supervisor wiener said that is one of the considerations that they would make in the final determination. the distinction that is proposed before you this 50' buffer, it's an automatic no-go. it's an automatic no-go at the counter, unless you are able to get the approval of the restaurant in that proximity. so i just wanted to make sure that that distinction of saying that it's going from 300' to 50' is not going from 300' to 50'. 50' is the starting sort of consideration and so if there are restaurants next to restaurants next to restaurants that are within that 1500' -- i mean that 50', that 50' g
are involved in land use issues have about this legislation and feeling that it may make it harder for people to respond to real issues of c-e-q-a. i'm not sure about all the abuses that are being referenced. i don't know what those abuses are. my position, i'm a chair of a land use committee of neighborhood association, [speaker not understood] valley association which comes to castro and upper market. on my level there is some abuse of c-e-q-a. c-e-q-a is hardly even brought to bear on the kind of projects that we're looking at. * no abuse however, eureka valley has an enormous number of historic resources which have not been mapped and have not been surveyed except for the windshield survey which, as i read the legislation, it seems as though those historic resources are not official and would not be protected with some level of protection would be removed by this legislation. they wouldn't be defined as historic resource, something like that. it's very com merit indicated, though. * complicated so, i think ordinary people who don't have a background in the law, they just have to rely on
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16